more from Harré,R./Madden,E.H.

Single Idea 15284

[catalogued under 14. Science / C. Induction / 5. Paradoxes of Induction / b. Raven paradox]

Full Idea

The question about Hempel's Paradox is whether contraposition is not only equivalent in truth, but equivalent tout court. It forcibly inserts new predicates into a context of properties known to be connected by nature.

Clarification

A→B so ¬B→¬A is contraposition

Gist of Idea

Contraposition may be equivalent in truth, but not true in nature, because of irrelevant predicates

Source

Harré,R./Madden,E.H. (Causal Powers [1975], 7.I)

Book Reference

Harré,R/Madden,E.H.: 'Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity' [Blackwell 1975], p.123


A Reaction

[compressed] This seems to capture quite nicely the intuition most people have (which makes it a 'paradox') that the equivalent predicate is irrelevant to the immediate enquiry. The paradox is good because it forces the present explanation.